Greater London Region GREATER LONDON 1/204 (B.01.A131) TQ

Transcription

1 GREATER LONDON City of Westminster 1/204 (B.01.A131) TQ OLD BURLINGTON STREET, 19 CLIFFORD STREET AND SAVILE ROW Old Burlington Street, 19 Clifford Street and Savile Row, London W1, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Museum of London Archaeology Service London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 35pp, figs, tabs, refs The archaeological desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, and the likely impact on this of the proposed redevelopment, the main component of which was the redevelopment of the site to create retail, gallery and office spaces. Although it did not fall within one of the City Council's defined Areas of Special Archaeological Priority the historical and archaeological evidence suggested that the site had some archaeological potential. Roman and medieval field systems had been recorded in the vicinity of the site though there was a higher possibility of post-medieval development of the site including peripheral evidence of the Civil War defences that were thought to exist in the site vicinity. Consultation of the Greater London SMR, archaeological archives of archaeological sites in the vicinity, and other historical data indicated potential for archaeological of local and regional significance with particular reference to occupation from the 17th to 18th century. However, in the areas of the existing basements, survival was likely to have been minimal and confined to deep cut features. These remains, if present, could (depending on survival quality) be of archaeological importance. The principal impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of areas of archaeological features, which may have survived beneath the modern basement slab level of between and 20.49m OD. The report concluded that further investigation (an archaeological field evaluation) may be necessary to determine the exact nature and depth of such deposits. [Au(abr)] 1/205 (B.01.A110) TQ KEAN STREET 15 Kean Street, City of Westminster, London WC2. A Desk-Based Archaeological Assessment Hall, J London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 43pp, figs, refs A desk-based assessment was undertaken in advance of the proposed residential redevelopment of the site. The site lay within a Special Archaeological Priority Area, Lundenwic (Middle Saxon London), as designated by the City of Westminster. The Covent Garden Conservation Area lay a short distance to the south-west. The site did not contain any Listed Buildings or SAMs. The available plans detailing the current site showed that present floor levels were at 20.42m AOD. Street level was at 20.27m AOD. A review of documentary, geological, archival and cartographic sources indicated that the site lay in an area known to have archaeological potential. There was evidence for prehistoric and Roman occupation in the immediate area but, most importantly, the site lay within the Middle Saxon settlement known as Lundenwic, which occupied approximately 60has of the Strand/Aldwych/Covent Garden area c.ad Research, including evidence from a geotechnical watching brief, showed that significant undisturbed archaeological deposits were unlikely to have survived on the development site. Therefore, AOC recommended that it was not necessary for further archaeological investigations to be carried out. [Au(abr)] 1/206 (B.01.A114) TQ

2 18 MADDOX STREET 18 Maddox Street, London W1, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Miller, P London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 33pp, figs, tabs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, and the likely impact on this of the proposed redevelopment, the main component of which was the installation of new drainage runs and a possible new light pit in the existing basement. Although it did not fall within one of the City Council's defined Areas of Special Archaeological Priority the site was located in a significant archaeological and historical area just to the south of Oxford Street and the Tyburn settlement, both of which had been the focus of occupation since the Roman period. However for most of its past, until the early 18th century, the site lay in a largely rural area to the east of the River Tyburn and south of the Roman road. The Civil War defences constructed in the mid 17th century may have crossed the site. The base of the ditch may have survived just below the basement as it was thought to be about 3.0m deep. Consultation of the Greater London SMR, archaeological archives of archaeological sites in the vicinity, and other historical data indicated potential for archaeology of local, regional and possibly national significance with particular reference to the possible remains of Civil War defences. However, in the areas of the existing basements, survival was likely to have been minimal and confined to deep cut features. These remains, if present, could (depending on survival quality) be of archaeological importance. The principle impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of areas of archaeological deposits and features, which may have survived beneath the modern basement slab level of between and 21.05m OD. The report concluded that further investigation (archaeological evaluation) may be necessary to determine the exact nature and depth of such deposits. [Au(abr)] 1/207 (B.01.A130) TQ KNIGHTSBRIDGE An Archaeological Assessment of Knightsbridge, City of Westminster, London SW7 Le Quesne, C London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 40pp, figs, refs A desk-based assessment was undertaken in advance of the proposed residential redevelopment of the site. The site was currently occupied by Mercurt House, a large post-war office building. The site did not contain any Listed Buildings and did not lie in an area of Special Archaeological Priority. Borehole records from Knightsbridge Green and adjacent sites had revealed that the underlying drift geology, with up to 10m of alluvial material overlying London Clay and the terrace gravels in places. These deposits were all likely to be Palaeolithic in date, possibly dating between any time from 250,000 to 20,000 years ago. They may contain traces of past human activity. It had long been thought that a Roman road formerly ran down the line of Piccadilly and along Knightsbridge. The historic boundary of Knightsbridge and Kensington, running to the north of Brompton Road and through the southern half of the Knightsbridge site, could have also represented the former line of such an early road. There was evidence to suggest that Knightsbridge had some form of independent status in the Saxon period, when it was granted to Westminster Abbey by Edward the Confessor. Medieval records suggested that it formerly extended further to the north, across the modern area of Kensington Park, on the west side of the Westbourne stream, joining up with the manor of Westbourne, with which it formed a single manor in the medieval period. It seemed likely that any settlement at these periods, as in the early postmedieval period, was focussed on the road junction at Knightsbridge Green. The effect of the development proposals would mean that Palaeolithic period deposits would be largely removed in those areas with three levels of basements. There were areas of the site which would have already been affected by the current basements although it was thought that archaeological deposits still existed beneath these. Further impact in localised areas would be created by the foundations of lift shafts, staircases and a car ramp. The Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service were consulted about former schemes and a borehole survey was commissioned in to provide data about the Palaeolithic period deposits on the site. The proposals would also require the removal of any later archaeological deposits (later prehistoric, Roman, Saxon, medieval), that may have survived on the surface of the alluvium in those areas not currently occupied by basements. It was recommended that trial excavation of these areas be carried out as soon as possible to allow a judgement to be made regarding any further archaeological mitigation of the current proposals. [Au(abr)] 2

3 1/209 (B.01.A113) TQ HAYMARKET, 1-5 SUFFOLK PLACE & 23 SUFFOLK STREET 3-7 Haymarket, 1-5 Suffolk Place & 23 Suffolk Street, London SW1, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Howell, I London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 37pp, figs, tabs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site and the likely impact on this of the proposed redevelopment. The main archaeological potential was for possible remains associated with the western limits of the Saxon settlement of Lundenwic. Probable archaeological deposits and features consisted, in summary, of truncated features such as pits and ditches. The principle impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of archaeological features, which may have survived beneath the current basement slab in the area of the lower basement and lift pits. The reported concluded that further investigation (field evaluation) may be necessary to determine the exact nature and depth of such deposits. [Au(abr)] Archaeological periods represented: PM 1/210 (B.01.A106) TQ WHITEHALL PLACE 3-8 Whitehall Place, London. Archaeological Assessment CPM London : CPM, 2001, 68pp, figs, tabs, refs Work undertaken by: CPM The site lay in an Area of Special Archaeological Priority A (Lundenwic and Thorney Island) as designated in the City of Westminster UDP. There were no SAMs in the vicinity of the site, but the facade of 3-8 Whitehall Place was Grade II* Listed. The development site lay in the northern part of the precincts of the Palace of Whitehall. The yards and buildings were used by the royal household until the fire of 1698 when they were converted into private dwellings. The area was redeveloped in 1816 when Nos. 3-8 Whitehall Place were constructed. The area was redeveloped in 1816 when Nos. 3-8 Whitehall Place were constructed. These buildings were demolished when the current building was constructed in The proposed scheme involves demolishing the existing core of the building and constructing a new one behind the Grade II* Listed facade. The development proposes to reuse the current basement slab, but included the option of sinking c.300 mini piles approx. 23cm in diameter through the existing slab. However, this was not the preferred option. The presence of the sub basement and basement levels in the building was likely to have removed any potential archaeological remains within the footprint of the building to -1.09m AOD. If the mini piling option is used there would be no impact on any archaeological remains. The scope of archaeological mitigation would therefore be very limited and could consist of sampling alluvial deposits from any future site investigation boreholes for palaeo-environmental remains. In summary, there were likley to be no archaeological constraints on the proposed scheme by the mini-piling option. [Au(abr)] Archaeological periods represented: PM 1/211 (B.01.A108) TQ BREWER STREET, 6-10 LEXINGTON STREET Archaeological Desk Based Assessment. 32 Brewer Street, 6-10 Lexington Street, London W1 Chadwick, P London : CgMs Consulting, 2001, 28pp, figs, refs Work undertaken by: CgMs Consulting 3

4 The site, currently occupied by a multi-storey car park and adjacent four-storey office building, was being proposed for redevelopment. A particularly limited archaeological potential was identified for several periods and this was further reduced by a basement across the site that would have truncated and destroyed archaeological evidence on the site. However, Palaeolithic artefactual evidence had been found reasonably close to the study site and it was anticipated that English Heritage would seek the monitoring and, if artefactual evidence is present, the recording of a witness section. [Au(adp)] 1/212 (B.01.A112) TQ PORTMAN SQUARE Desk Study, Portman Square Arup Geotechnics London : Arup Geotechnics, 2001, 24pp, figs, refs Work undertaken by: Arup Geotechnics The site was developed from traditional late Saxon and medieval farmland in the mid to late 18th century. Gravel pits existed in the vicinity in 1743 and could have been developed anywhere in the area prior to the period of construction and, indeed, gravel could have been extracted as part of the construction process for the basements. The site was occupied by 4 to 5 storey Georgian town houses until the 1960s when they were replaced by the current structures. The typical geological sequence in Portman Square was up to 2.8m of made ground over approximately 5m of sandy gravel over approximately 28m of London Clay. An intermittent perched water table was found at the interface of the gravel over the London Clay, ground water in the underlying Woolwich and Reading formation rises into the base of the London Clay in boreholes to this depth. Tunnels of the Post Office and the London Ring Main ran very close to the site at depth and detailed information was being obtained. No archaeological evaluation, excavation, or watching brief was proposed for this development as the present basement complex was set below potential archaeological levels. During the engineering site investigation any samples of anything looking like old fill should be retained for assessment of age and character. During the development of the new basement the character of the exposed gravels should be observed. [Au(adp)] 1/213 (B.01.A132) TQ BERKELEY SQUARE, MAYFAIR Archaeological Desk Based Assessment. 40 Berkeley Square, Mayfair, London Chadwick, P London : CgMs Consulting, 2001, 29pp, figs, refs Work undertaken by: CgMs Consulting An archaeological desk-based assessment was undertaken in advance of the proposed redevelopment of the site in order to clarify the archaeological potential of the site. Particularly, English Heritage drew attention to the close proximity of the study site to the infilled course of the River Tyburn. They indicated that since a nearby archaeological investigation (at 51 Berkeley Square) had located deeply stratified river deposits containing well preserved organic material and, since this represented an important resource of evidence for past landscapes and environments, any planning permission should be subject to a planning condition requiring a programme of archaeological investigations. However, this desk-based study established that the site had a low potential for deposits of prehistoric or Roman date, that during the Saxon and medieval periods it lay in the Manor of Ebury and was farmland and that, more particularly, whereas 51 Berkeley Square lay close to a former channel of the River Tyburn (which was diverted to its current course in the 1670s), the study site lay at least 180m north-west of the Tyburn. As a result, similar organic rich deposits would not be anticipated on the study site. Additionally, historical sources indicated that Brickearth extraction had taken place in the 1550s and 1740s and that subsequent developments, most recently a basemented 1930s building, would have removed the archaeological potential of this site. [Au(adp)] 4

5 1/214 (B.01.A109) TQ BELL STREET An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment of Bell Street, London NW1 Report No. : JSAC 870/01/01 Herring, C Newark : John Samuels Archaeological Consultants, 2001, 34pp, figs, refs Work undertaken by: John Samuels Archaeological Consultants An archaeological desk-based assessment was undertaken in advance of the proposed demolition of both buildings and the erection of one six-storey residential building. The site lay within the Paddington and Lillestone Villages Area of Special Architectural Priority and on the south-west edge of Lisson Grove Conservation Area. There was little evidence for early prehistoric activity in the vicinity of the proposed development site other than one findspot of a Palaeolithic stone axe some 250m to the north-east of the site. The west end of Bell Road butted on to Edgeware Road which followed the course of the major Roman road Watling Street but nothing dating to the Roman period had been found either in the wider vicinity of, or within the site itself. The earliest mention of land near the proposed development site was in a surviving 10th century Anglo-Saxon charter, which confirmed that King Edgar granted lands at Paddintune to St Peter's Westminster. The Domesday Survey in 1086 recorded that Lilestone manor was a small settlement held from the King. The place-names and the documentary evidence confirmed a late Anglo-Saxon presence. However, only one Saxon sherd had been found c.450m to the west of the study site. During the early post-medieval period the area still appeared to be isolated from London. In 1553 Sir William Portman bought 270 acres of land which included a number of fields in the manor of Lilestone. Later cartographic evidence showed that Bell Street was developed by 1745 when it appeared to be the main street of the village of Lisson Green and buildings lined both sides of the road. Neither the maps nor historical evidence revealed any significant ecclesiastical or secular buildings in the vicinity of the proposed development site. There were no SAMs in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development site nor were any of the buildings bounding the site Listed. The closest Listed Building was the telephone kiosk outside 56 Bell Street on the corner with Lisson Street. The location and topography of the proposed development site outside the City of London, and the archaeological evidence to date, suggested a low potential for further archaeological remains. The cellars at 48 Bell Street may also have damaged any surviving archaeology. An archaeological evaluation at Bell Street revealed nothing of archaeological interest. It was concluded that the site had a negligible potential to contain archaeological remains and that no further action should be taken with regard to archaeology. [Au(abr)] 1/215 (B.01.A111) TQ KING STREET 43 King Street, London, WC2, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Barber, B London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 44pp, figs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, and the likely impact on this of the proposed development scheme, which involved the refurbishment of the Grade II* building. Possible archaeological deposits and features consisted, in summary, of Saxon cut features including pits, wells, burials and a 9th century defensive ditch relating to the 7th-9th century town of Lundenwic, while potential post-medieval features included cess-pits, wells, wall footings or cellars associated with the 17th century development of King Street. The principle impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of the upper parts of cut features which may have survived beneath the existing basement slab across the entire area of the basement. In particular locations (underpins, thrust blocks, drain rubs etc), the proposed works would remove totally all surviving features. The report concluded that further investigation may be necessary to determine the exact nature and depth of such deposits. [Au(abr)] Archaeological periods represented: PM 5

6 1/216 (B.01.A119) TQ GROSVENOR STREET Grosvenor Street, London, Westminster, W1. A Desk-Based Archaeological Assessment AOC Archaeology Group London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 58pp, figs, tabs, refs The site lay within the Conservation Area of Mayfair, but did not contain any Listed Buildings or SAMs. The site was not located within an Area of Archaeological Priority designated by the City of Westminster. The Tyburn Settlement Area of Special Archaeological Priority lay some 450m to the north of the proposed development site. The development scheme involved the renovation and alteration of the existing building behind a retained facade onto Grosvenor Street. All floor levels, except the 5th floor, would be lowered by a distance between 0.04m and 0.52m. The basement slab would be lowered by a depth of 0.11m. This would have the most impact upon stratigraphical soil horizons, and therefore it was this aspect of the development which would affect any potential extant archaeological remains. Documentary, geological, archival and cartographic sources showed that the site lay on the upper western slope of an alluvial valley formed by the scouring of the River Tyburn. The archaeological potential within the study area (which was within a radius of roughly 800m) was high. However, human action in the immediate area of the site appeared to have been characterised by marginal agricultural activity. Therefore, although remains from several archaeological periods may have been present on the development site these did not appear to have been occupation type sites and the intensity of archaeological remains was likely to have been low. The archaeological potential of the site was modified and diminished by the probable impact of previous developments there. Previous excavations in relatively modern times, such as quarrying and the excavation of basements, were likely to have truncated and destroyed the majority, or indeed entirety, of any archaeological remains. It was not anticipated that extensive undisturbed archaeological remains were likely to be extant upon the proposed development site. Therefore, AOC recommended that no further archaeological investigations were deemed necessary. [Au(abr)] 1/217 (B.01.A134) TQ BBC BROADCASTING HOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LANGHAM STREET BBC Broadcasting House Development, Langham Street, London W1, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Assessment Howell, I London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 39pp, figs, tabs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, the main component of which was the surviving remains of 18th century properties, and the likely impact on this of the proposed redevelopment. Probable archaeological deposits and features consisted, in summary, of cut features, such as wall foundations and quarry or rubbish pits. The principal impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of all potential archaeological deposits and features, which may have survived beneath Langham Street. Broadcasting House itself was a Listed Building. Archaeological monitoring of engineering test pits at Broadcasting House revealed no archaeological deposits or features. This report concluded that the potential for the survival of archaeological remains was very low. [Au(abr)] 1/218 (B.01.A117) TQ BOW STREET POLICE STATION Bow Street Police Station, City of Westminster, London WC2. An Archaeological Assessment Hemley, S London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 42pp, figs, tabs, refs 6

7 The site lay within the Covent Garden Conservation Area and was a Grade II Listed Building. The site did not include any SAMs but lay within an Archaeological Priority Area, Lundenwic (Middle Saxon London), as shown on the Proposals Map, City of Westminster Unitary Development Plan. A review of documentary, geological, archival and cartographic sources indicated that the site lay in an area known to have archaeological potential. Research demonstrated that a long history of human activity had occurred in the vicinity of the site, dating from prehistoric times up until the present day. The region of the site was particularly renowned as the location of Middle Saxon settlement within London. The Police Station had existed upon the site since its construction in the late 19th century and contained basementing across a large proportion of the site including part of the central courtyard. Prior to the construction of the existing buildings, a patchwork of buildings were present upon the site, though it was not known if basements/cellars existed within these buildings. The proposed development plan involved the construction of a new building within the courtyard area to the rear of the existing Police Station. It was proposed that the basement would extend over the area covered by the existing basement and extend into the basemented area, up to the boundary with the Magistrates building. The Police station itself was to be retained. It was also proposed to include a turntable in the yard way in an area which contained no basement. The plan to was to use this building as an extension to the museum and as offices. When comparing the depth of the basement upon the site with the depths of surviving archaeology found within the area, it seemed extremely probable that archaeological remains survived on the site, particularly dating to the Saxon period. It was therefore recommended that an archaeological evaluation be undertaken. [Au(abr)] 1/219 (B.01.A118) TQ FORTRESS HOUSE, 23 SAVILE ROW Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, W1, London. An Archaeological Assessment Hall, J London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 49pp, figs, refs The site lay within the Conservation Area of Regent Street, but did not contain any Listed Buildings or SAMs. The site was not located within an Area of Special Archaeological Priority as designated by the City of Westminster. There were, at present, no definite plans for the redevelopment of the site. The archaeological potential within the study area was low. Human action in the immediate vicinity of the site appeared to have been characterised by marginal agricultural activity. The archaeological potential of the site was modified and diminished by the probable impact of previous developments upon the site. Previous excavations in relatively modern times, such as the excavation of basements, and World War II bomb damage were likely to have truncated and destroyed the majority, or indeed entirety, of any archaeological remains. It was not anticipated that extensive undisturbed archaeological remains were likely to be extant upon the proposed development site. Therefore, AOC recommended that no further archaeological investigations were deemed necessary. [Au(abr)] 1/220 (B.01.A116) TQ GOLDEN HOUSE, GREAT PULTENEY STREET Golden House, Great Pulteney Street, London W1, An Archaeological Assessment Foster, R London : AOC Archaeology Group, 2001, 46pp, figs, refs The site comprised a turn of the century office building dating to 1911, occupying an area of c.0.4ha. An archaeological desk-based assessment was commissioned in support of a planning application for the redevelopment of the site. The site lay within a Conservation Area (No. 14, Soho), but did not include any Listed Buildings. The site did not lie within a designated Area of Archaeological Priority nor did it include any SAMs. The proposed office building would involve a major refurbishment and partial rebuilding scheme. The works were likely to include some excavation below present basement level to allow for new foundations. Documentary, geological, archival and cartographic sources indicated that the site appeared to have a limited archaeological potential. The existing office building was erected in 1911, after the demolition of the original buildings 28-31, dating to the 19th century, 7

8 which were part of the Pulteney Estate from which the present street name was derived. Prior to that there was no evidence for building on the site which, up until the late 17th century, was part of a large area known as the Windmill Fields. Although the site lay quite close to areas of fairly high archaeological potential, there appeared to be little possibility of important archaeological remains being encountered by the proposed groundworks. No archaeological deposits were recorded in a small area observed. The whole of Golden House was 4 metres below the level of Great Pulteney Street and it was likely that any potential archaeological deposits would have been truncated during the original basement excavation. Therefore the report recommended that no further works were deemed necessary. [Au(abr)] 1/221 (B.01.A133) TQ KINGS COLLEGE, STRAND LANE Kings College, Proposed New Archive Buildings, Strand Land, WC2, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Barber, B London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 48pp, figs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, and the likley impact on this of the proposed redevelopment, the main component of which was the construction of a new building incorporating four levels of basements, across the entire site outline. Probable archaeological deposits and features consisted, in summary, of possible middle Saxon activity behind the waterfront areas, remains of the medieval Strand Inn and the Tudor palace and gardens of Old Somerset House. The survival of medieval and post-medieval remains had already been established during archaeological monitoring on previous geotechnical pits. The principal impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of all archaeological deposits and features which had survived beneath the existing ground slab and its make-up. The report concluded that further investigation may be necessary to clarify the exact nature and depth of such deposits. This evaluation could take place at the same time as future geotechnical investigations undertaken by the developer. [Au(abr)] Archaeological periods represented: MD, PM, UD 1/222 (B.01.A011) TQ ST MARTIN-IN-THE-FIELDS CHURCH, ST MARTIN'S LANE St Martin-in-the-Fields Church, St Martin's Lane, London WC2, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Assessment Hoad, S London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 53pp, figs, tabs, refs This report considered the archaeological potential of the site and the likely impact on this of the refurbishment options currently being considered. At present the development scheme involved extension to the basement in three areas and extensive works within the existing basement footprint for the new layout. Any new groundworks beneath the present basements and vaults (or within the small areas considered possibly unbasemented) were likely to affect any surviving archaeological remains. The main archaeological interest lay in two themes: the development of the church and churchyard and the fact that the site lay within the 7th-9th century Saxon town and trading centre of Lundenwic. Indeed the two themes may have been linked, as it had been suggested that the medieval church may have had Saxon origins, possibly built over or associated with a relatively early (7th century) Saxon cemetery. A stone coffin of this period was uncovered when the present church was built c The existing basements and vaults would already have removed the majority of the original archaeological sequence and stratification. However, because of the marked topographic slope, south down St Martin's Lane, the impact would have been much less severe in the southern half of the study site. The potential was considered to be for localised truncated cut features to the north (including perhaps deeper or earlier burials from the northern churchyard) and better survival, including some archaeological stratification 8

9 to the south. These desk-based predictions had to some extent been confirmed by the results of a series of geotechnical investigation pits. The site potential was reflected in the status of the vicinity as part of one of Westminster City Council's Areas of Special Archaeological Priority, where particular planning policies applied to the protection of buried remains. A formal archaeological evaluation was recommended in order to clarify the nature and extent of archaeological survival across the site, as well as further discussions with the project team, so that an appropriate mitigation strategy can be devised. [Au(abr)] Archaeological periods represented: MD, RO 1/223 (B.01.A107) TQ THE CALEDONIAN CLUB, 9 HALKIN STREET The Caledonian Club, 9 Halkin Street, London SW1, City of Westminster. An Archaeological Impact Assessment Miller, P London : Museum of London Archaeology Service, 2001, 46pp, figs, tabs, refs The desk-based assessment considered the archaeological potential of the site, and the likely impact on this of the proposed construction of a new extension to the existing building at basement and ground floor levels. The report also included the results of the watching brief which suggested from geotechnical test pits and a borehole that the east side frontage may have been subject to some truncation but the rear of the site outside the limits of the existing basement may have remained relatively undisturbed. There was some potential for prehistoric activity being present on the site as the watching brief established that brickearth deposits still existed across the site. It was this deposit, along with the Thames terrace gravels in this area, that had a general background potential for artefacts dating from the prehistoric period to occur in. There was also potential for features associated with medieval and post-medieval agricultural activity to be present on the site. There was greater potential for later post-medieval remains on the site if quarrying or later 20th century building campaign had not removed the potential archaeology. The site had housed a chapel from the late 18th/early 19th century until the early 20th century. Evidence of this chapel or activities associated with it may still be present on the north and east side of the site. The principal impact of the proposed works would involve the removal of any archaeological deposits and features, which may currently survive beneath the present building, in particular at the east of the site. The report concluded that further investigation (an additional watching brief) may be necessary to compliment the existing watching brief data to determine the exact nature of such deposits. [Au (abr)] 9